Travelling/sitting
 

I've lurked on here long enough I should know the answer, but . . .

NFHS. Player gains possession of ball while laying down. Sits to throw ball. Travel?

I know it's a travel if he stands, but I thought sitting was OK, at least unless he used the sitting to move somewhere?

Check your casebook. 4.44.5 Situation B

Sit Up, Pass, Shoot, Start A Dribble, Request Timeout …
 

A few interesting interpretations below:

4.44.5 SITUATION B: A1 dives for a loose ball and slides after gaining control.
A1 is in a position either on his/her back or stomach. What can A1 do without
violating? RULING: A1 may pass, shoot, start a dribble or call a time-out. Once
A1 has the ball and is no longer sliding, he/she may not roll over. If flat on his/her
back, A1 may sit up without violating. Any attempt to get to the feet is traveling
unless A1 is dribbling. It is also traveling if A1 puts the ball on the floor, then rises
and is first to touch the ball. (4-44-5b)

4.44.5 SITUATION C: A1 is dribbling when he/she: (a) drops to a position with
a knee on the floor and then ends the dribble; or (b) drops one knee to the floor
and then stands again while continuing the dribble. RULING: The action in both
(a) and (b) is legal. However, if A1 touches a knee to the floor while holding the
ball, it would be traveling as A1 has touched the floor with something other than
a hand or foot.

4.44.5 SITUATION D: A1 secures possession of the ball with one knee in contact
with the floor. May A1 assume a standing position without committing a traveling
violation? RULING: It depends on what A1 does. If A1 attempts to stand up
while holding the ball, a traveling violation occurs. However, if A1 starts a dribble
and then rises, no violation has occurred. Also, A1 could pass, try for goal or call
a time-out from that position.

I would love to--but don't have one. I'm not a basketball ref--I would hope I would know this rule backwards and forwards if I was!

EDIT: thanks Billymac!

EDIT 2: I'm guessing that, in the opinion of the referee (yeah, I know that is soccer lingo, but I'm a soccer ref...), he had possession before he was on his back, so called him for rolling over rather than sitting up. From the comfort of the stands, I didn't think he had possession till he was on the back, and thought the call was for sitting up, which I thought was wrong. Of course, my opinion from the stands doesn't matter. . . I just like understanding the rules as much as I can.

Updated Misunderstand Rules List Will Be Posted Soon ...
 

Is this the only time that a player will travel and will not be holding the ball?

From the Misunderstand Rules List: A player must be holding the ball (with one very rare exception) in order to travel.

Just checking. I'm about to post an updated List.

This has been discussed. Holding or touching? I believe, can't recall what consensus was, there is the possibility with shooter losing control and then touching. Also, NFHS case 4.44.2 Sit C. Player throws ball over defender and catches it. Instead of catching (ruled a travel in case book), wouldn't it also be a travel just for touching the ball? If so, that would be an example of someone not holding it. ??

Touching ...
 

Just touching instead of catching (holding)? Sounds like a travel and is yet another example of someone traveling without not holding the ball.

I will change my List to read: A player must be holding the ball (with rare exceptions) in order to travel.

Thanks.

That case has been discussed before. At one time, the case play declared it an illegal dribble. By rule, that is more correct than calling it a travel since traveling does indeed required the ball to be held while moving the feet (still with one exception). There is no exception needed to call it an illegal dribble (for not letting it hit the floor).

One Exception ...
 

Thanks.

I will change my List to read: A player must be holding the ball (with rare exception) in order to travel (changing "exception" from plural to singular).

Note: It's nice to know that a few Forum members actually read my very numerous posts. I will admit that sometimes I post things that are self serving, the posts help me understand things, or remind me of things. As a retired teacher, I know that scientific studies substantiate that the physical act of writing (and possibly typing, or keyboarding) boosts learning. That's why I always had my students take notes in class every day, even if the material was in the textbook. This method may not have helped all of them to learn (there are so many different learning styles) but it definitely helped many of them to learn and to achieve success in my classroom.

I would change the word "holding" to "controlling." Consider walking down the floor while continuously controlling the ball by tipping/tapping it in the air over and over. This controlled tipping/tapping would be traveling imo but yet the ball is not being held. I prefer the word controlled. Just my 2 cents.

Incorrect. Holding is the correct word. What you described is an illegal dribble.

Rule 4-15 DRIBBLE:
Since it isn't allowed to hit the floor, that makes it an illegal dribble.

If "controlling" were what made it a travel, a normal dribble would then be a travel.

The case play (throwing over an opponent) is ruled traveling. It even notes "...since the ball did not touch the floor.."The case play contradicts what you indicated. I could be convinced otherwise, but for now, I am sticking with controlling.

Either way, no one would bat an eye about calling a violation.

Carrying/Palming ???
 

I'm intellectually intrigued by carrying/palming violations. There's an official NFHS signal for carrying/palming listed under violation signals, yet there is no definition of a carrying/palming violation in NFHS Rule 4, there is no such violation described in NFHS Rule 9, nor is such a violation mentioned in the Casebook.

All we've got is a signal, and an oral history of the violation communicated by old grizzled veteran officials sitting around a campfire, eating beans and farting.

My personal description of carrying/palming is when the ball comes to rest in a player's hand, and the player either travels with the ball, or illegally dribbles a second time, but I'm not a NFHS Rules Editor, nor do I play one on television.

Even absent a definition or description, as United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said in 1964, "I know it when I see it" (a expression by which one attempts to categorize an observable event, although the category lacks clearly defined parameters), so I do use the signal.

I guess that we could technically do without a carrying/palming signal, instead using the travel signal, or the illegal dribble signal, where appropriate.

I often wonder why a signal with no such violation?

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M...=0&w=203&h=175

Palming/carrying does show up in Rule 4.15.4.b
ART. 4

The dribble ends when:

b. The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.

There may not be a clear definition of it, but the description is almost self explanatory. And the mechanic signal depicts exactly what happened. I guess you could also say it's a double dribble, since the carrying action is nothing unless they push the ball to the floor again, hence the dribble ended on the palming, then another dribble.

No Such Animal ...
 

Good point, but this doesn't define a violation, rather it defines one of several ways that a dribble ends.

Ball handlers allow the ball to come to rest in one or both hands (carrying/palming) dozens of times in a game without violating.

If said player ends his dribble by allowing the ball to come to rest in one or both hands (carrying/palming) and then moves his pivot foot in excess of legal limits, then that's a travel violation.

If said player ends his dribble by allowing the ball to come to rest in one or both hands (carrying/palming) and then dribbles again, then that's an illegal (double) dribble violation.

I still contend that there is no definition, description, or interpretation of a carrying/palming violation that is not already either a travel violation, or an illegal (double) dribble violation.

If the NFHS removed the carrying/palming signal from the book, it wouldn't be the end of the world, in all cases we could use either the travel signal, or the illegal (double) dribble signal, to communicate the specific violation.

That being said, I use the carrying/palming signal all the time. Like Supreme Court Justice Stewart, "I know it when I see it".

And apparently so do players, coaches, and fans. I never get a question like, "Was that a travel carrying/palming violation, or was that an illegal (double) dribble carrying/palming violation?".

I just find it odd that it's a violation signal without an actual defined violation.